The Blah-Blah-Blahs Of The Anti-Reform Crybabies About Foreign Direct Investments

I remembered I wrote about the blah-blah-blahs of anti-reform crybabies about the parliamentary system. There have a lot of blah-blah-blahs here and here so I thought about writing the blah-blah-blahs concerning foreign direct investments. It would be a good thing to enumerate the stupidity of these groups - especially among the FILIPINO COMMUNISTS. Well, it's time to evaluate these blah-blah-blahs and discuss why they are wrong.

"But only foreign investors will get rich! They will plunder our resources and we will all become poor! "

The lie that only foreign investors will get rich is one of the most blatant lies to anybody who studies history. It reminds me of how I had an argument with someone over it. This is the same lie that Neri Colmenares of Bayad Muna has been spouting OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Thankfully, the guy already lost several races. Thankfully, Toady Casino himself has also become irrelevant one way or another. Yet, the same lie is still spread all over again. There are still some anti-reform pasaway "thought leaders" who are still propagating the same lie OVER AND OVER again. Hmmm... application of the quote of Joseph Goebbels, anyone? 

For a start, think about the supreme irony that, as a start, OFWs are sent to countries that GREATLY BENEFIT from foreign investments. Why do you think that OFWs are sent to countries like SINGAPORE and CHINA for a start? It's because there are hardly any unreasonable restrictions. Some countries (like Vietnam) don't allow foreigners to own land. However, Vietnam doesn't subject its foreign investors to the 60-40 restriction which is just super RIDICULOUS. Vietnam is taking over the Philippines by the numbers not because they don't have the Duterts and Marcoses - it's because they don't have that unreasonable restriction.

Want a real picture of foreign investments and development? We can talk about two Asian miracles that brought two countries once poorer than the Philippines to a bigger tiger. There's the late Lee Kuan Yew and the late Deng Xiao Ping for a start. The devastation that Mao Zedong did to China was worse than Marcos. China was left severely crippled when Mao died. Deng didn't say that China isn't Singapore. Instead, Deng went to visit Lee in Singapore. Deng, though a communist, went to the USA and told them, "Communist China is open for business!" Deng then proceeded to implement communism with Chinese characteristics. Vietnam also became another real Asian miracle when its communist government saw Marxism doesn't work and created the Doi Moi manifesto. 

The idea of foreign invasion from foreign investors is just stupid. Here's a big illustration for a start. We have commercial spaces whether they be plain commercial buildings or shopping malls of any kind. How do commercial space owners of any kind get wealthy? Do they say that only the tenants will get rich if they let them invest in the mall? Did they operate using a rule of 60-40 with their tenants? Nobody in the right mind will ever rent a space if they were only allowed to own 40% of their net income and their landlords get 60%. The concept goes the same for foreign investors. The Philippines acts as the MALL. Foreign investors are the tenants. Tenants can continue to enrich themselves in the space for rent provided that they PAY RENT AND FOLLOW RULES. Foreign investors can enrich themselves in the Philippines provided that they PAY TAXES AND FOLLOW RULES. In reality, it's inviting foreign investors without unreasonable restrictions except paying taxes and following certain rules. Rules such as hiring Filipino citizens first, obeying labor laws, being transparent if ever there's a local partner involved (in the case of a joint venture like Gong Cha in Taiwan), and the like are to be expected. 

"It will just increase our debts! Letting foreigners invest here means increasing our foreign debts!"

I find it funny (and VERY ANNOYING) at the same when there are some people who can't differentiate foreign investment from foreign debt. Somebody might even be stupid enough to say that the Marcos Years weren't the golden years because of foreign investments. WUT? Marcos accumulated TOO MUCH DEBT from foreign banks. A debt is an investment but an investment isn't necessarily a debt. The Marcos Years were protectionist-based for the Marcos cronies. What the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. wasn't getting foreign investment via debt. What Marcos did was accumulate foreign debt to fuel whatever machinations he had which were mostly for the benefit of him, his wife,  and his cronies. Hmmm... will anybody please prove that the Marcos Years were pro-foreign investment for a billion pesos tax-free? 

I'd like to bring back the illustration of the shopping mall to help make things clearer. The founder of the mall will naturally accumulate debt from the banks when he or she builds the ball. What would be the best course of action? The best course of action is to lease out the mall and get as many well-paying tenants as possible. However, think about what if the one who builds the mall thinks that letting tenants rent out the mall will not allow payment of the debts. The result of the mall owner thinking like that will be detrimental. The result is that the bank will have no choice but seize his assets because the mall didn't gain any income to pay the rent back.

On the other hand, foreign investments function differently from foreign debt. As mentioned earlier, the Philippines is the real estate space and the foreign investors are potential tenants. So, when foreign investors do business in the Philippines - they gain income but that income is subjected to certain taxes like business tax, land tax, and income tax. Foreign investors are required to pay their rents and mortgages if they expect to do business. Pay your rent to your lessor and pay the mortgage to the banks. The lessor has the duty to KICK OUT tenants who don't pay regardless of nationality. The bank has the right to deny mortgage to any tenant who is a delinquent and to seize assets if necessary to make up for the losses.

"Opening up the Philippines to foreign investments will allow China to take over it!"

This again is another favorite excuse of the anti-reform crybabies AS IF China is the only country outside the Philippines. Did they even view a world map? One can always talk bout how POGO is a good example of why we should reject foreign investment. Instead, POGO is a result of protectionism. Protectionism has allowed more illegal Chinese to do business than legal Chinese investments. Then again, if one is wary of Chinese investments then there are certainly OTHER COUNTRIES, right?

I was thinking about certain foreign investments present in the Philippines. Certain industries are definitely not subjected to the negative list. Some multinational companies expand via international franchises. So are all those foreign investors in the Philippines, well, Chinese? If there are any "Chinese" investors - some of them are either from TAIWAN or HONG KONG. Establishments like Tiger Sugar and Chatime are from TAIWAN. Did these establishments allow Taiwan or any of those countries of origin to take over? Not at all. 

The big excuse that the economic cha-cha is for the Chinese to takeover is stupid. Foreign investors can come from many different places. One can get an investor from South Korea, another from Japan, another from Taiwan, and still be wary of Chinese investments. Mahathir Mohamad became wary of some Chinese investments while embracing others. Vietnam also has done something similar by accepting other foreign investments they know are better than Chinese investments. Investments can be welcome even if one can be wary about Chinese investors due to their ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). 

"Instead of relying on foreigners - why don't we first develop our own capabilities."

Let's go back to the real estate lessors of any kind. Now, just think about it people like the late Henry Sy and the late John Gokongwei are real estate lessors. Did they say that they will just rely on their capability and not let anybody rent their spaces for rent? Instead, they decided to lease out their spaces to potential new tenants. The income of commercial space is dependent on tenants. No tenants, no income, get it? Instead, Sy and Gokongwei invited over potential tenants. Go to a shopping mall and look at the tenants. You see different tenants like Jollibee, National Bookstore, etc. Did the tenants take over the mall? Instead, they enriched the mall. Sy and Gokongwei developed their own capabilities by RELYING ON TENANTS.

First-world countries rely on all forms of businesses (whether local or foreign) to fuel their economy. Deng once stated that it doesn't matter if the cat is black or white if it catches mice. Deng didn't care if the investor to his communist state was Chinese or a foreigner - all he cared about was that it delivered good results. British steel or Chinese steel didn't matter - all Deng cared about was that China's steel industry was developed. Deng's vision outweighed Mao's vision. Mao was an idealist man who only knew how to party. Deng was a realist man whose ideals focused on reforming Chinese communism. The question is did Deng defeat the idea of developing China's capability by allowing foreign investments? Instead, Deng decided to develop China's capabilities by inviting foreign investors to do business in China. Deng treated foreign investments as tenants. The result was that China developed its own capabilities when it allowed foreign investors to do business. Deng followed Singapore's model and it worked. Lee stated the failure of traditional communism.

This would also address the economic ignorance of Benign0 from Get Real Philippines and Rigoberto Tiglao from the Manila Times. Some people think that the country must first develop its own capabilities before opening the country to foreign investment. History has proven that wrong. Deng didn't wait for the Chinese people to develop their own capabilities. Deng told Americans his communist state was open for business right there and then - it was when China was still POOR when Deng went there. Lee didn't wait for Singaporeans to develop their own abilities. Instead, Lee invited foreign investors to do business in Singapore and provide jobs for Singaporeans. Truth is the businesses are in their condition because of a LACK OF COMPETITION. 

Besides, one must think that foreign investments are both threats and opportunities. If there's any reason why local businesses in the Philippines stagnate is the lack of opportunities. Instead, it should be viewed as an opportunity for local businesses to grow. The local businesses will have more opportunities to grab better service providers, better suppliers, and even MORE CUSTOMERS to add. Every competitor to your customer is a potential new customer. Every competitor to your supplier or service provider expands the network. If people are afraid of competition then they have NO RIGHT to do business, right? Instead, the result of too little competition has created an environment of STAGNANCY for some industries that are still subjected to the negative list. 

The ironic part is that imported materials are used to promote economic protectionism. Some of those bozos are actually using APPLE PRODUCTS. If they want to develop the "Sariling Atin Only" mentality then they should start using all local products first. Then again - the truth of them being nationalists is that they're just hungry for power.